By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony Discussion - Can Sony afford to make PS5 more expensive than PS4 launch price?

 

How much should it cost?

400 45 52.94%
 
450 15 17.65%
 
500 21 24.71%
 
550 0 0%
 
600 0 0%
 
600+ 4 4.71%
 
Total:85
Ljink96 said:
Intrinsic said:

Sheesh.... how can you be so confidently wrong.

What he means is that games are made with the jaguar CPUs in the consoles in mind. So they sre holding back rhe advancements that would otherwise be possible on the current generation if PCs on the market today.

What sense does it nakw for him to buy a i9 or ryzen seven when the game was designwd to run on a jaguar?

There's a difference between your PC itself being held back and games that run on your PC being held back. I wasn't referring to the latter. He literally said PCs are being held back by those CPUs, not Games being developed by software teams are being held back. Just mean what you say.

Man....comprehension is not your thing, right?! Sorry...I thought you were following our discussion.



Around the Network
Ljink96 said:
Intrinsic said:

Sheesh.... how can you be so confidently wrong.

What he means is that games are made with the jaguar CPUs in the consoles in mind. So they sre holding back rhe advancements that would otherwise be possible on the current generation if PCs on the market today.

What sense does it nakw for him to buy a i9 or ryzen seven when the game was designwd to run on a jaguar?

There's a difference between your PC itself being held back and games that run on your PC being held back. I wasn't referring to the latter. He literally said PCs are being held back by those CPUs, not Games being developed by software teams are being held back. Just mean what you say.

lol... you're good.



Errorist76 said:
Ljink96 said:

Yeah, I still think gens are over...where did I say I didn't say that? 

3) Never said the Xbox One X will hold its own against the Next PS Console

 

^^those two things are contradictory.

 

Please...please tell me how. I think "Generations" by how the average gamer interprets them, are over. Then I said the Xbox One X wouldn't hold it's own against PS5... how do you even connect the two?



The poll speaks pretty loudly. $400-500 US seems to be where the companies should aim.
I personally find that $400 like with PS4 was a good price for release. I would probably be okay stretching up to $450, however if it was $500 they really need to justify it. You have to remember that these prices do not translate in a simple currency exchange which can effect rest of the world buyers.

Sony does have good sales going for them which may help to get a good bargain in production.



Ljink96 said:
Errorist76 said:

3) Never said the Xbox One X will hold its own against the Next PS Console

 

^^those two things are contradictory.

 

Please...please tell me how. I think "Generations" by how the average gamer interprets them, are over. Then I said the Xbox One X wouldn't hold it's own against PS5... how do you even connect the two?

Just read Intrinsic‘s comment on top of this page. He has already addressed that point.



Around the Network
Intrinsic said:
Ljink96 said:

Yeah, I still think gens are over...where did I say I didn't say that? All I said is you/whoever can think what they want to think. I'm sticking with Microsoft. And I meant 499, just a typo.

You do realize that "gens are over" means forward compatibility right?

Its going to shock you when in 2020/2021 MS releases an XB2 whose games can't run on the XB1/XB1x (and that will be the end of this generations are over nonsense).

Hence why i said you are setting yourself up for disappointment.

I think we have a disconnect between what we think are generations. And using compatibility as a standpoint is just off. There are consoles that support software emulation, or hardware emulation that are considered previous gen and next gen, respectively. All I'm saying is the chronological generations are done, there won't be a collective 9th gen, or 10th gen, as like I said, we don't even want to acknowledge Nintendo Switch as 9th gen. It's not a mid hardware upgrade, it's an entirely new device.

There were features of the 32X (4th) that wouldn't be available until 5th gen (without integrated chips) and yet it was still considered a 4th gen console. So using features as a way to quantify is never solid either. I just think it's silly to put consoles in a box of a generation now.  



Errorist76 said:
Ljink96 said:

Please...please tell me how. I think "Generations" by how the average gamer interprets them, are over. Then I said the Xbox One X wouldn't hold it's own against PS5... how do you even connect the two?

Just read Intrinsic‘s comment on top of this page. He has already addressed that point.

Obviously, there's a disconnect between what each of us thinks a generation is. I'll just leave it at that. Using CPUs to gauge generational leaps is as broken as ever, as Nintendo again puts a wrench in the logic in this thread as Nintendo consoles haven't been generational leaps since the 64 to Gamecube. There's just no right or wrong answer, I'll just stick with my interpretation. And that's really all you can do. 



Ljink96 said:
Errorist76 said:

3) Never said the Xbox One X will hold its own against the Next PS Console

 

^^those two things are contradictory.

 

Please...please tell me how. I think "Generations" by how the average gamer interprets them, are over. Then I said the Xbox One X wouldn't hold it's own against PS5... how do you even connect the two?

Ok, being the average gamer that I am, my understanding of generations means that every couple of years, the platform holders release new consoles that run games you can only play on them. Hence we have PS4/XB1 games thst you cant juat put into a PS3/360 and it will work.

So "generations are over" to me means that going forward, everything works on everything. I don't know which other interpretation of that phrase exists. It means that someone with an XB1x now, has (if they choose) bought the last console they will ever need to buy because in 2023, when Fallout 5 ia released you can just take the game and slap it into XB1x and it will run.

For thay to be possible, it means the XB1X (and more importantly, the PS4/XB1 but lets just pretend the XB1X is its own new generation of hardware) can and will hold its own against the PS5 and XB2. Because it will at least be able to run theirr games by default albeit at a lower rez bjt at least you can just go to store and buy a XB2 game and put it in the XB1X and it will work.

We are telling you that that is Bullshit. That there will be a XB2 and its games will not work on the XB1/XB1X. Which is the literal definition of what the average gamer understands by generations. 

So yes, its contradictory to say gens are over and and also say the XB1X won,t hold its own against the PS5/XB2. 



Ljink96 said:
Errorist76 said:

Just read Intrinsic‘s comment on top of this page. He has already addressed that point.

Obviously, there's a disconnect between what each of us thinks a generation is. I'll just leave it at that. Using CPUs to gauge generational leaps is as broken as ever, as Nintendo again puts a wrench in the logic in this thread as Nintendo consoles haven't been generational leaps since the 64 to Gamecube. There's just no right or wrong answer, I'll just stick with my interpretation. And that's really all you can do. 

Sigh..... you are all over the place. The nintendo switch is more powerful than the wiiU. has features that the wiiu lacks. You cannot make a game for the switch and it will by default work on the wiiU.

I don,t know qhy you think gens are gauged by the CPU, the wholw reason the CPU came into this was cause it was the easiest way to prove a poibt to you that you have just refuswd to grasp. 

Gens are about new things that are possble that requires new hardware to run. 

You know what nvm.......



Intrinsic said:
Ljink96 said:

Obviously, there's a disconnect between what each of us thinks a generation is. I'll just leave it at that. Using CPUs to gauge generational leaps is as broken as ever, as Nintendo again puts a wrench in the logic in this thread as Nintendo consoles haven't been generational leaps since the 64 to Gamecube. There's just no right or wrong answer, I'll just stick with my interpretation. And that's really all you can do. 

Sigh..... you are over the place. The nintendo switch is more powerful than the wiiU. has features that the wiiu lacks. You cannot make a game for the switch and it will by default work on the wiiU.

I don,t know qhy you think gens are gauged by the CPU, the wholw reason the CPU came into this was cause it was the easiest way to prove a poibt to you that you have just refuswd to grasp. 

Gens are about new things that are possble that requires new hardware to run. 

You know what nvm.......

lol, you said that CPU is the main driver behind it! You're all over the place too! I'm just stating facts here. Dude, if gens were based on new things that are possible through new hardware, there should have been 20 generations by now, lol. Yes, please just forget it. Because there is no concrete definition for game console generations, and because one company thinks differently than the other, neither of us are right. Like I said, stick with how you interpret it. Done.

Last edited by Ljink96 - on 03 March 2018